Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-02-10
THE MORE CASE.
This "Cause Celebre'Again
on the Tapis.
A RE-HEARING ASKED FOL
Bryce, of Santa Barbara. Genes
Before the Supreme Court tor
writ of Certiorafi.
spscfa, to ti. R<rala ss sAe asssesa:ed rss.sl

spscfa. to tis R<rala sn sAe isssrsa:ed Prets
San FRAScrsco. February 9.-Tbs
cass of the People va A. p. Mere
charged with the killing of China1nas
on the island of Santa Rosa, in Jane,
1854. was sgsin brought to the asten
tion Of the Supreme Court to day by the
fling in the Clerks office by ex-Districi
Attorney BoYcs Of Santa Ban bzra county
Of . petition for rs-hearing. and . pes;.
ton for writ of eersiOrsri. On the l7th
Of January Last the Supreme Court rem.
dered decision dismissing the appeal
from the order of the Superior Jucgs oi
Santa Barbara county (Ha.ch,. dismiss
ing the case and aischarging More on
the ground Of self-dsfense. The attor-
ney for the people claims in his petition
for q re-hearing that the section Of the
Code which permits the dismissal Of q
case by . court limits the exercise in thai
it can only be done sin furtbereuce oI
iustice," and the rsasons must be sc;
forth in the minutes The petition con
cludes as follows: "In principle We
claim that the authority bestowed upon
the court in section 1855 is in NO way IN
unlimited one; that il - cifcumxcribed
and limited in its very terms, and il il
the duty of tbis court to see tia: the
power Is exercised within those limits.
The absurd;ty and enormity Of the doc.
trine resulting from the rule announced
in this opinion Is gIa<ingty illustrated ia
The present case, where the Ju ge bases
his decision upon false premises. and
under secrecy of the shades of night,
on finding that the order previously
issued from the privscy of his closet Ia
insufficient, in the absence of all the
parties interested in the snit, fAisely sna
willfuIly embodies sns
aud uutruthfui statements In order to
spread them, by his authority, upon the
records o. court OF justice. and abb
srarily dismisses criminal prosecution
for the crime of manslaughter. and sheu
escapes even supervision Of the appel
late tribunal, and Els action goes IN.
Questioned. Tie theory carried to its
fnll extent woald allow Judge of the
trial court, after . case has reached q
point like the one at bar, where the
statute Of limitations was about to fall,
or hsd already fallen, TO announce from
the bench, that for and in consideration
of the present payment to me of sum.
cient sun Of soul-seducing gold, / here
by, of my own motion, order the crimi-
nsl action now pending In this court
against the defendant herein to BE- dis
m ssed.
.And no redress cccld be had by
the people for such action, the Judgs
having resigned his Office. We DO moi
believe thss this court viii establish
such doctrine CT announce such to be
law CT this land"
The petition for writ of certiorari
states that according to section D, arfi-
Gle vi. Of the Constitution no Judge of
q court of record 10 allowed to practice
law in sny court of this State darieg his
continuance in office. 1t then goes on
to cay. st appears ID. p. Hatch, at the
time Judge Of the Superior Court of
Santa Barbara county. and before whom
the case Of Mere was then pending, in
the mouth of May, lSS6, lsst Santa Bar
para aud took up his resiiencs in
Los Angeles entering into . partnership
in that city with one J. BrOussean. at
toruey of that city, aud, under the firn
name of Broussesu L Hatch, engaged
actively In the practice of the law. A
number Of cases are cited In which
Hatch appeared as tine attorney Of par
ties interested during tine months OF
May and June last. From the petition
it further appears that Hatch came 10
the city OF Santa Barbara on the 29sh Of
June, 1856. snd. pretending 10 act es
Judge of said Superior Court OF Santa
Barbara county. called the Sheriff and
Clerk of said county into the court room
at 20 o'clock in the evening and, in
the presence of these persons, only,
opened COURT He then cansed sn or
der to be entered upon the minutes oi
the court disInissiny the case. Upon
this statement OF facts it Is
claimed that the order dismissing
the case and the attendant acts o;
Hatch were null and vci9, and that they
are not proceedings of the Santa Barbara
county Superior Court Therefore O
writ of certiorori Is asked, that all pro-
csedings in the case may be reviewed by
the Supreme Court The attorney gem
ersl, Hon. George A johnson, is assc-
ciated with Mr.. Bsycs on behalf Of the
people.
There is at lesst cne error in the
above. Judge Hatch did net dismiss
the case on the ground of self-defenss;
but on the ground that he did not have
jurisdiction over the case. the homicide
having occurred on the island Of Santa
Rosa, which is more than three miles eli
shore in Santa Barbara county. and
therefore not in the legal boundaries Of
the county.-ED. HERALD